Letters to the Editor
-
So where's the link?
Or was the link to Echidne's rigorous analysis at the end of the post supposed to suffice?
-
Evolutionary psychology is not a "cultish pseudoscience"
I am mystified by this kind of neanderthal nitwit name-calling. Yes, some parts of evolutionary psychology make some people uncomfortable, but the people who are uncomfortable are usually trying to figure out why, as a woman, they just failed the Firefighter Physical Exam for the 34th time.
There are, in fact, biological preparations for many of our activities. Why do men find young women beautiful, and older more mature and wise women not desirable? That makes tremendous sense from the evolutionary psychology standpoint. We men find young women beautiful because beauty means "childbearing ability." Smooth skin, small faces, regular features, clean skin, large breasts - these are the clues to us men that this little hunk-a-pulk is rarin' to go, babywise. As women age, and men as well, our skin becomes less clear, hair changes, etc. Women lose their ability to bear children.
-
The author's ignorance is amazing really
Pam Anderson once said, "If I understood the relationship between motherhood and breast size, I could have saved a ton of money." Breasts get bigger during and after pregnancy, and WOW-KAZOWEE!! men who noticed this over the billions of years mated with those women, and had more children.
In addition, as the father of teenage girls, I believe that you can predict that interest in men is a function of the size of breasts. As girls get sexually mature, their breasts get bigger, and this has an influence on their behavior.
Those who talk of "cultish pseudoscience" should do some research. Has the author read any evolutionary psychology? Even a watered-down pop version would count.
-
WARNING!!!
Serious troll-bait.
This article has been up almost an hour and only 3 comments? You boys are slackin'!
-
The hard hitting rebuttal to the Psychology Today left me cold
Was there anything in there except for rhetorical questions and unsupported alternate explanations for the conclusions? Hardly more rigorous than the article in question (which at least claims to be based on research).
I don't think attacking Evolutionary Psychology (which, by the way I think is a growing rather than shrinking discipline, although I may be wrong. Carol Lloyd seems to think it is a holdover from the 1800s or something) by fostering reasonable doubt is a meaningful rebuttal. This isn't a murder case.
-
What about...
Black women. As a man am I supposed to be evolutionarily hardwired not to like black women?
What's up w/ that?
The black women I've dated will (and will date) surely be upset.
-
"...clubfoot-holds in the academy..."
Cute!, but I'm not sure...
"Maugham's club foot which tromps the clay of life into a lovely chorus line of English prose; on your left the dead Romantics, gone into that same earth ..."
Somerset mightn't take exception.
-
Re: the Human Race
Humans are still, despite our great intelligence, animals. Keeping this in mind, why in the world should it be considered a moral flaw that most of us, male and female alike, are attracted to secondary sexual characteristics? Should we chastise the baboon for drooling over a swollen rump, or the doe for appreciating a heavy rack? It's clear that the author of this weak critique doesn't like superficiality, but if I had an air mile for every one of life's truths that I disliked, I could fly to Saturn.
-
I don't know
if this article is true or not. I read it originally and figured without more data points it is just another set of studies.
But I will tell you one thing that is 100% true.
If this article had flattered women, the feminists would be hollering up and down the boulevard about how great the study conclusions are and how they prove women are superior and that men suck after all. Proving once again of course, that at its core, modern feminism is a ruse, a put on. a joke.
-
Blonde Hair big boobs
Well I can see why men like those types of women, but I don't see how it could be supported by evolutionary evidence as most of the worlds population has dark hair and dark eyes.
African people, asian people, latin american people, indian people, arabs, so how would blondes be the preference when most of the world ain't blonde? I think it's more the rarity aspect than blondes look youthful longer because isn't age objective anyway. I was watching a make over show and they put the woman in a box and random street goes would guess her age and so many of them would be very far off, some by a decade or more.
Plus many blondes american and european ladies get their hair color out of a bottle, so blondes aren't outbreeding even white European brunettes by hooking up with other blondes since they are just so the cream of the crop ey.
As for the rest of it I don't care, I like rising about my animal impulses not using them as a justification to be a shallow asshat.
-
MyCroft, Lemme explain
Should we chastise the baboon for drooling over a swollen rump, or the doe for appreciating a heavy rack?
Since feminism above all is a rhetorical gimmick designed to make men hand over more goodies to women, truth is the first casualty in this war.
Women say what they need too say, truth is not part of this, to get the effect they want.
In this case, when women chastise men for being shallow, they are attempting to do a lot of things, namely:
- to contrast themselves against men, in effect implying that if men are this way, women are not this way- that women are not shallow and driven by their genitals. the reality could not be further from the truth, indeed it is the other way around, since science is proving lately that men spend more time looking at a woman's face and body before either rejecting or not rejecting someone than women do, that men look at the face first, not the body, and that men are interested in much more than mere looks anyway, namely is she a pleasant, trustworthy person.
- to keep poking that stick at men. If all women criticize all men all the time, eventually the cumulative attacks leave men with low self esteem (along with their artificially pumped up shallow egos courtesy of the opposing force of female flattery), in essence making men pliable and more suggestible to ludicrous things like men assuming they are responsible for women's happiness or that it is natural for men to hand over money to women.
- to try to weasel out of the mating game. If women can convince enough men that white is black, at least in their imagination, then the less than good looking women can get the Brad Pitts. Sorry, but men have 4 billion years of ingrown genetically juiced habit informing them which woman is hot and pliable and worth fucking and which one is the nasty old dog, not worth the bother.
There is more, but I want to move on to something else